http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?article_id=22817 Please spare me the usual demonization of the site or author diversionary tactics and stick to the points made in the article. It appears as though abortion is still illegal in the United States of America! "But I digress. Let's get back to my main point. Abortion is still illegal. To understand why, you must begin by doing something few Americans bother with anymore -- reading the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," it says. Important words all. But I want you to focus right now on those to whom this document applies. Who are the subjects and beneficiaries of the Constitution, as stated clearly in the preamble? The answer? "… to ourselves and our posterity. …" The word "ourselves" in this context refers to those men who wrote it -- and to their generation of Americans. "Posterity," which literally means "descendants" or all succeeding generations, refers, in this context, to all those Americans yet unborn. Is your great, great, great, great granddaughter your posterity? Absolutely. Is she born yet? Absolutely not. Does the fact that she is not yet born make her any less your posterity? No. Now, specifically what rights are ascribed by the Constitution to ourselves and our posterity? ..."
Silly boy, if a fetus is aborted, it never becomes part of "posterity", does it now? Imagining that your great, great, great, great granddaughter is your posterity doesn't mean it will ever come about, and therefore there will be no beneficiary to "the blessing of liberty, etc." There is no obligation documented in the Constitution for citizens to produce "posterity", it is just assumed that out of the vast numbers of citizens "posterity" will be produced.
I assume World Nut Daily has an explanation for the Roe v Wade ruling, then? That is most ridiculous argument against abortion I have ever read. Does this dude (the writer of the article) mean to say that someone who hasn't been conceived yet is actually a person? He's twisting one argument to make another.
I am curious. do you really agree with that line of reasoning or you are just siding with it because conveniently it is against abortion.
Whaler: Have you followed WND's track record? From predicting the end of the world to claiming that Israel had the world's largest oil reserves and their decade long stock swindle, to the birther idiocy.
What difference does any of that make? If they can say something against abortion they MUST be right, intellect is not required to confirm it.
Posterity in this case is not referring to the unborn...it's referring to those who will be born. If a baby is aborted, it is not part of that whole posterity thing. Nice try.
It is actually illegal according to the 10th amendment which says: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This means that each state gets to decide on abortion or the people get to vote on it. Neither of these happened.
Have you been here long enough to remember the immortal "Men should have no opinion on abortion" thread?
Well if you had reasoning ability you would realize that aborting a child violating posterity is the whole point here.
It is not at all necessary for any level of government to decide on abortion or for the people to vote on it. The people can make those decisions individually. That truly empowers people.